Labor curves based on cervical dilatation over time and their accuracy and effectiveness: A systematic scoping review

This systematic scoping review was conducted to 1) identify and describe labor curves that illustrate cervical dilatation over time; 2) map any evidence for, as well as outcomes used to evaluate the accuracy and effectiveness of the curves; and 3) identify areas in research that require further investigation.

A three-step systematic literature search was conducted for publications up to May 2023. We searched the Medline, Maternity & Infant Care, Embase, Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos, CINAHL, Scopus, and African Index Medicus databases for studies describing labor curves, assessing their effectiveness in improving birth outcomes, or assessing their accuracy as screening or diagnostic tools. Original research articles and systematic reviews were included. We excluded studies investigating adverse birth outcomes retrospectively, and those investigating the effect of analgesia-related interventions on labor progression. Study eligibility was assessed, and data were extracted from included studies using a piloted charting form. The findings are presented according to descriptive summaries created for the included studies.

Of 26,073 potentially eligible studies, 108 studies were included. Seventy-three studies described labor curves, of which ten of the thirteen largest were based mainly on the United States Consortium on Safe Labor cohort. Labor curve endpoints were 10 cm cervical dilatation in 69 studies and vaginal birth in 4 studies. Labor curve accuracy was assessed in 26 studies, of which all 15 published after 1986 were from low- and middle-income countries. Recent studies of labor curve accuracy in high-income countries are lacking. The effectiveness of labor curves was assessed in 13 studies, which failed to prove the superiority of any curve. Patient-reported health and well-being is an underrepresented outcome in evaluations of labor curves. The usefulness of labor curves is still a matter of debate, as studies have failed to prove their accuracy or effectiveness.